I have been reading some of the posts concerning The rolling roof Idea. First off, What Knucklehead thought of this idea? The idea was a bad idea from the get go. The rolling roof would require the stadiums to put down artificial turf or Field Turf, the roof might not seal right to heat or cool it for a final 4 NCAA game and what happens if there is a chiefs game in the afternoon and a Royals game in the evening the roof and surrounding area would have to be cordoned off while the roof is moved (I know that the fans for the games start comming pretty early and this would have been a safety concern). Now fast forward to today, The measure has been voted down, David Glass has all but said no to moving the Royals I think that Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums should rethink their approah to doming their confines. These 2 stadiums would do better with 2 totaly seperate roofs that could be opened and closed with a good seal to keep the cold air out and the warm air in. When this measure cumes up again the residents of Jefferson county should think about if they want to spend money to do this thing right or spend money on wasted utility costs on an umproperly sealed building.

No trees were destroyed in the sending of this contaminant- free message.However, a significant number of electrons have been inconvenienced.

And yes, I thought the rolling roof idea was crap to begin with. Why on earth would we put a roof over Kauffman Stadium? How many rainouts do we have, and who really cares if there's a couple of them a season? The only roof that should've been considered is one for Arrowhead.....a GOOD retractable roof, one that doesn't take a long time to move and doesn't make a shit ton of noise. I believe the roof idea may have passed if it didn't involve a rolling roof for both stadiums. A single roof for Arrowhead would be much less expensive and there wouldn't be that ugly track along side the stadiums. Plus it would allow us to have a possible Final Four, although I don't know how excited I'd be about fans having to go to the middle of nowhere to watch the games.

Sorry! Here in Kansas we have both counties and I can't keep them straight here. Jackson has Holton as its county seat and Jefferson has Oskaloosa as its county Seat. They are even neighbors to each other North of here.

No trees were destroyed in the sending of this contaminant- free message.However, a significant number of electrons have been inconvenienced.

Frankly I don't see the point of a retractable roof on Arrowhead. How often would it even be opened? For a few of the early season games maybe, and then after that it'd be closed. If KC ever got a Super Bowl or Final Four, it would be closed for those events, too. If you're gonna put a roof on Arrowhead, you may as well just put an actual roof on it. Not that I have actual numbers to back this up, but I'm guessing a retractable roof would be significantly more expensive than a regular dome, and for very little gain.

Of course, putting a roof on Arrowhead at all would be a travesty. Football's not meant to be played inside. If KC were to get a Super Bowl, it would be a one shot thing, just the NFL's way of paying its respect to Lamar Hunt. Do we really want to put down a few hundred million dollars and ruin the regular football experience there to get one game that none of us would be able to go to, and that despite the economic windfall for the city, would still probably not make up for the cost of building the roof in the first place? (Actually, looking at the numbers now, USA Today says the Super Bowl brought about $274M into Detroit; the rolling roof, if memory serves, was supposed to be about $200M, but I don't know how much a fixed roof would cost, so maybe there would be a net gain after all, although one must also consider that building a roof isn't the only economic investment the city would have to make to prepare to host a Super Bowl.) For the Final Four, it's even worse. One Business Week article says the Final Four doesn't really bring any significant payoff (actually causes economic growth to slow down). Even [url=http://www2.ncaa.org/portal/media_and_events/press_room/2006/july/20060720_mff_economic_impact_rls.html[/url]the NCAA[/url] puts the economic impact at around $40M, which, in the event that KC didn't get a Super Bowl, would represent a huge loss...I mean, when people say you've got to spend money to make money, they usually count on eventually making back more than they spent in the first place. Building a roof of any kind over Arrowhead is stupid.

And building a rolling roof or roofing Kauffman is about the most tremendous waste of money I can think of. How many games did the Royals have rained out this year? I can only think of one right off hand (back in April, against the A's). Any roof at TSC is a stupid idea, but if there was gonna be one, it should only be over Arrowhead.

i thought the rolling roof idea was stupid ,and a gimmick also i believe one,or two things were going to happen with the roof tax money.one they were going to say "after careful consideration we have decided that the rolling roof concept is still not practical.there for we are going to raze arrowhead and build a new 525 million dollar retractable roof stadium." that idea i like,because i would love to see k.c. host a superbowl (even knowing everyone in the media would belly-ache about spending time in too cold,and too boring k.c.)but anyways the second thing could have been putting it in the already bloated maintenance fund which would and already pisses me of!!! plus the roof was suppose to be white, tough to see a baseball with that ceiling.

anniewarbucks wrote:I have been reading some of the posts concerning The rolling roof Idea. First off, What Knucklehead thought of this idea? The idea was a bad idea from the get go. The rolling roof would require the stadiums to put down artificial turf or Field Turf, the roof might not seal right to heat or cool it for a final 4 NCAA game and what happens if there is a chiefs game in the afternoon and a Royals game in the evening the roof and surrounding area would have to be cordoned off while the roof is moved (I know that the fans for the games start comming pretty early and this would have been a safety concern). Now fast forward to today, The measure has been voted down, David Glass has all but said no to moving the Royals I think that Arrowhead and Kauffman stadiums should rethink their approah to doming their confines. These 2 stadiums would do better with 2 totaly seperate roofs that could be opened and closed with a good seal to keep the cold air out and the warm air in. When this measure cumes up again the residents of Jefferson county should think about if they want to spend money to do this thing right or spend money on wasted utility costs on an umproperly sealed building.

i liked it, even though i thought it to be a shitty idea overall, because it would have brought us a national spotlight with the final four and a superbowl.

but you are wrong annie, the stadiums would not need artificial turf. seattle, houston, zona, many stadiums have retractable roofs, and grass. you simply leave it open unless it is game day and raining, otherwise, let it rain. toronto being the exception to this, but they do have some harsh ass winters too.

MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!!

KCFutbol wrote:Why on earth would you think that a rolling roof, which was part of the original design, would necessitate the use of artificial turf?

The roof would have been parked between the stadiums most of the time.

It's a valid concern when considering the large events they were promoting. There would be issues when it came time for a floor for a basketball game or hockey game to be installed. There may also be issues when the stadium were sealed up for big events, for which prep time ranged from two weeks to two days (these details weren't 100% worked out). Grass could die when covered for two or more weeks.

They did mention something about possibly putting grass on pallets and carting it in and out but I didn't really understand how that would work very well as a playable surface.

Kard wrote:It's a valid concern when considering the large events they were promoting. There would be issues when it came time for a floor for a basketball game or hockey game to be installed. There may also be issues when the stadium were sealed up for big events, for which prep time ranged from two weeks to two days (these details weren't 100% worked out). Grass could die when covered for two or more weeks.

They did mention something about possibly putting grass on pallets and carting it in and out but I didn't really understand how that would work very well as a playable surface.

Some stadiums use the portable grass concept currently.

If the grass dies after an event like the final 4 or the frozen 4 they would probably replace the sod, they do that pretty often with the combined damage the Wiz and the Chiefs give it anyway.

Build new where? The only way to build a new arrowhead is to demolish arrowhead and build a new one, that wouldn't happen in the time from post season to pre season.

However if they were smart and did move the Royals Downtown, you could have demolished the K, build an 80,000-85,000 seat stadium that is state of the art, and play freely at arrowhead. Not only would you have had more people in a stadium, and a new state of the art stadium, but also enough parking and tailgating space for those additional people.

But nope, David Glass decided he'd continue to be one of the big and greedy idiots in baseball... Lamar Hunt could have gotten a rolling roof has the Royals moved and if the plan had been better.

It's over with, now I'm dreaming about what I, and others on this forum can help happen in 15-20 years. DT Royals Stadium and a new Arrowhead in 2020!

Because tailgating requires parking lots and lots of open space... Besides, the riverfront cannot hold a stadium, or even support over 80,000 people. Besides, it doesn't not fit the master plan for the riverfront. It would take up over half the space for the riverfront redevelopment and turn it into parking lots.

However, you could demolish the casino and put the stadium and parking there... But that would put major stress on the Paseo bridge and a new Missouri river bridge. If I had to choose a location, i'd either choose the TSC, or the current site of the casino on the riverfront.The Riverfront Park wouldn't be able to hold the amount of people it should, half of the park would stay the same as it is today, barren, unused (except for being used a few times for games every year).

It's over with, now I'm dreaming about what I, and others on this forum can help happen in 15-20 years. DT Royals Stadium and a new Arrowhead in 2020!

never happen. kauffman renovations will not even be done before 2010, and the royals will be in basically a new stadium at that point, as will the chiefs. the earliest you can hope to ever see dt baseball in kansas city is about 2035-2040, who knows if baseball will still even be around or as big by then.

KCMax wrote:Why would a new Arrowhead have to be built at the Truman Sports Complex? Put it on the riverfront if you're going to build new.

why must these dt ballpark conversations live on, it is over, it is done. not going to happen, not now, not ever.

MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!!

Yea, I wasn't talking about interfering with the current Berkeley Park Riverfront plans, I was thinking more on the other side of the river. Getting rid of Isle of Crappy and replacing it with Arrowhead II would be pretty cool IMO. And it would probably help Berkeley Park, particularly if we had a cool pedestrian bridge linking the two.

Are you sure about the flooding issues? I thought they had fixed such issues. I can't believe they would consider investing so much in the Berkeley Park area if there were still flooding issues.

kcdcchef wrote:why must these dt ballpark conversations live on, it is over, it is done. not going to happen, not now, not ever.

Ever? Chef, I'm talking like 20 years from now when the current lease has expired and you know the Chiefs will be asking for a new stadium. Arrowhead will be 50 years old at that point. I'm sure its nice for you to think TSC will last forever and ever, but it simply will not.

Ever? Chef, I'm talking like 20 years from now when the current lease has expired and you know the Chiefs will be asking for a new stadium. Arrowhead will be 50 years old at that point. I'm sure its nice for you to think TSC will last forever and ever, but it simply will not.

dude, in about 3-4 years, both teams will be playing in what will ultimately be brand new stadiums. no way they are looking for new parks anytime before 2035-2040. it is a hot topic now because in the last 15 years, there have been so many new stadiums, domes, and arenas built in america it was astronomical. the building boom is coming to a halt though, anyone can see that. and the way these things are built now, heinz field versus 3 rivers, the linc versus veterans field, oriole park at camden yards versus memorial stadium, there are so many parks that went up that are designed to last like a half century plus.

you guys can dream about the teams coming downtown in 2040 all you want, but the reality of it is the way the parks got built last time was to stand the test of time, and they will be 35 years old when the renovations are in full swing, most of the stadiums that went up at the same time, 3 rivers, vet, riverfront, etc, are already gone. the renovations will be donw the same as they were in the early seventies, to stand the test of time. they are not adding a few concession stands and ribbon boards, they are going to redo completely both of those parks, you cannot compare that to what was done at the old busch in the 90's, or a few others that got minor repairs, this is a total and complete redo, and the only thing that will not get some work is the field.

accept the defeat from april and quit assuming that the renovations will only keep the two teams happy for 10 years because so many other stadiums are going up, they all replaced pieces of shit. like the location of the tsc or not, they are nice parks and always have been, the only downfall was the location.

MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!!

It's a good thing you will not be a community leader or lead developer in Kansas City, You'd never get anything done chef...

I tell you that we will get a Downtown stadium in my lifetime, and that no team is going to play in 50-60 year old stadiums. When the renovations are done, they won't be even close to new stadiums, just old stadiums that received facelifts. The Chiefs will eventually get a new stadium, especially since by 2010, KC should be at over 460,000 people, and by 2020, the metropolitan area will hold more people than it does now. Not to mention Downtown should be pushing 30,000-40,000 people (at the rate it's been going) There is no way for the Chiefs to expand arrowhead beyond 80,000 seats, yet if they built a new stadium with 85,000 seats, i'd be willing to bet it would still sellout.

Either way, we are getting new stadiums, I will never give up on the idea or the dream. You can be pessimistic and give up all you want to chef, but the truth is, the dream isn't going to go away anytime soon.

I tell you that we will get a Downtown stadium in my lifetime, and that no team is going to play in 50-60 year old stadiums. When the renovations are done, they won't be even close to new stadiums, just old stadiums that received facelifts.

ShowMeKC wrote:It's a good thing you will not be a community leader or lead developer in Kansas City, You'd never get anything done chef...

as opposed to how much could or would get done with someone who leaves 5-6 times a year and goes off each time saying "screw you guys i am out of here"

ShowMeKC wrote:I tell you that we will get a Downtown stadium in my lifetime, and that no team is going to play in 50-60 year old stadiums.

sure they will. they are presently playing in 34 year old stadiums, and they will be pushing 40 when the renovations are done. the renovations will buy both stadiums well over 20 years of new life, and that will make them both close to 60.

also, for reference, see yankee, dodger, fenway, wrigley, ballpark at anaheim, macafee collesium, if you would like examples of teams playing in either a) stadiums over 50 years old, or b) those almost at 40 with no end in sight.

Last edited by kcdcchef on Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!!

like i said before, I'm treated much differently on this site than in real life... In real life, you get second chances, and can have your slate cleaned... On here, few people forgive or forget anything. You being one of the main ones.

You live hundreds of miles away, you most likely don't come to KC very often. You sometimes take pessimistic or closed minded approaches to topics, if someone disagrees with you, or says something you don't like, you get angry, sit and curse them out and flame them. You hold grudges for minor incidents. You aren't planning on being a community leader, changing Kansas City or dedicating your entire life to improving Kansas City.

On the other hand, I live here, I go to KC often. i try to take positive viewpoints, if they aren't positive they are neutral, or are negative with a somewhat positive twist. I am not closed minded, I look at all possiblilities equally, I look at the facts and consider them. If someone disagrees with me, I get angry and very hot, I may blow up but I take breaks instead of staying and being mad all the time. I cool off and come back different than I was before. I don't hold grudges, I came back knowing you probably were still mad at me, however I couldn't care less and would still treat you like everyone else. Same for Bahua, I may have been mad at him, but I don't care, I'm over it, i'll treat him like I treat others. I am planning on being a comunity leader, I plan on changing Kansas City and improving inner city neighborhoods. I want to dedicate my entire life to improving Kansas City.

Now, I'm not going to argue any further.

Regardless, I'm not letting go of a Downtown Stadium, I guarantee you 100% it will happen in my lifetime. Like many community leaders have pushed and pushed for Downtown revitalization and got it, I will push for many things like light rail, a DT stadium, inner city revitalization, etc... LIke I said, I'm dedicating my life to improving the city, and seeing today's technology compared to what the future might hold, average people begin to live into their 100s, so I believe I have a long time to see a DT stadium and a new arrowhead.